<em>QuickPic AAC</em>: An AI-Based Application to Enable Just-in-Time Generation of Topic-Specific Displays for Persons Who Are Minimally Speaking
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As artificial intelligence (AI) makes significant headway in various arenas, the field of Speech-Language Pathology is at the precipice of experiencing a transformative shift towards automation. This study introduces QuickPic AAC, an AI-driven application designed to generate topic-specific displays from photographs in a "just-in-time" manner. Using QuickPic AAC, this study aimed to (a) determine which of two AI algorithms (NLG-AAC and GPT-3.5) results in greater specificity of vocabulary (i.e., percentage of vocabulary kept/deleted by clinician relative to vocabulary generated by QuickPic AAC; percentage of vocabulary modified); and to (b) evaluate perceived usability of QuickPic AAC among practicing speech-language pathologists. Results revealed that the GPT-3.5 algorithm consistently resulted in greater specificity of vocabulary and that speech-language pathologists expressed high user satisfaction for the QuickPic AAC application. These results support continued study of the implementation of QuickPic AAC in clinical practice and demonstrate the possibility of utilizing topic-specific displays as just-in-time supports.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".